Daniel Brandt wrote:....I started wikipedia-watch.org (now defunct). That site started collecting the real names of administrators on Wikipedia that were hiding behind screen names. For most of them I was able to include a photo, birthdate, and city of residence. After a year of doing this, I had dozens of administrators on this page.

My efforts were unappreciated by Wikipedians, but a "Biographies of living persons" policy was proposed by SlimVirgin and another Wikipedian in December 2005 and early 2006. However, it took another year or so before SlimVirgin came out firmly in favor of deleting the bio she started on me. Hundreds of edits had been made by all types of Wikipedians by then, and the article was getting longer and longer.....In Europe, the top EU court has affirmed the "right to be forgotten" with respect to the Internet. Too bad I'm unlucky enough to not be in Europe.

Tarantino wrote:Welcome back.

Some months ago now.....

CrowsNest wrote:One more reminder Dennis, this isn't Wikipedia, what comes naturally to you there as you play your games and strut your stuff, will not serve you well here. Talk to me like I am an adult who is not stupid, and you might get somewhere. Keep fucking me around, treating me like a little bitch, and yes, I will absolutely find a way for you to be held accountable in the real world, for the things you refuse to explain or justify here, or on Wikipedia, to my satisfaction.

You're the one who presented yourself to the world as someone enforcing the terms of a private corporation you do not speak for, on someone claiming to be a journalist, and who, if he had complied to your demands for his personal details, could have faced real world consequences if the block had not been lifted. If the potential consequences of that decision not being seen the way you want it to is now troubling you, well, you had your chance to be nice and answer a few simple questions posed by someone who quite clearly isn't stupid.

Tarantino wrote:CrowsNest, your hostility is not welcome here.

Hey Tarantino, you slimy turd. Cast your mind back and think on what Daniel Brandt would have done to your valued forum member and long time cowboy Wikipedia administrator dear old Dennis Brown, had he been around back in the day and done what he did to Brandt, what he did to (someone he is convinced was me and believed was trying to do harm to Wikipedia in the name of investigating its flaws).

When you've done that, have a real good think about what Brandt would have done to you, had you done to me what you did on Wikipediocracy, in defence of that Administrator.

Maybe Brandt doesn't know how the landscape of Wikipedia criticism has changed since he was a lightning rod of controversy, rightfully feared by people like Dennis. But if he wants a serious discussion about present day issues like EU law with people who think Wikipedia's Administrators should be held accountable when they stray from minor lawn tending to being major legal scholars for and on behalf of a deliberately silent WMF, he can come here. If he wants to be treated like an idiot and be surrounded by Wikipedia apologists and actual Wikipedia Administrators whose efforts to evade accountability and protect the cult's workings from being exposed are as brazen as they are serious, and are not only accepted but defended, he can visit your tin pot outfit.

Welcome indeed. You say so little, and yet perhaps even that much is too much for you to be able to retain any semblance of credibility as an actual Wikipedia critic, rather than some of the things people have been forced to surmise are your true motivators for doing what you do. Which is about as bad as it gets, without donning ski masks and wielding baseball bats. Irony of ironies of course, is you are evidently a fan and indeed emulator of Brand's methodology of disproportionate reciprocity, of ensuring real world accountability for Wikipedia acts, you just do it behind the safety of a screen. As do I, but for some reason you think me worse than some of the very people I and Daniel would definitely agree are not nice people. Like Dennis. Your ward and protectee.

Makes you wonder, does Brandt really see you as a brother in arms, one fit to welcome him......be a dear and bring him up to speed, would you? Oh boy. The stories I could tell Brandt about all of you fuckers on the shrinking ship that is your website's management team. And you knows I don't tell people no lies, I'd be a fool to lie to Brandt.

Don't bother. I'm really starting to suspect that "Tarantino" is merely a sockpuppet operated at least partly by a WP insider. He started out on WR long ago, supporting Brandt's Wiki-War, which eventually fizzled out (there is an endless supply of Wikipedia fan freaks to fight you to a standstill, no matter who you are or how many resources you've got). But since WO started to decline in 2015-16 Mr. T has gotten really intolerant and imperious. I don't get it.

Easy to see why Brandt gave up. In this sick little scene, even your "friends" might turn out to be enemies.

ericbarbour wrote:Don't bother. I'm really starting to suspect that "Tarantino" is merely a sockpuppet operated at least partly by a WP insider. He started out on WR long ago, supporting Brandt's Wiki-War, which eventually fizzled out (there is an endless supply of Wikipedia fan freaks to fight you to a standstill, no matter who you are or how many resources you've got). But since WO started to decline in 2015-16 Mr. T has gotten really intolerant and imperious. I don't get it.

Easy to see why Brandt gave up. In this sick little scene, even your "friends" might turn out to be enemies.

I remember one old WR thread that suggested a then-arbitrator, YellowMonkey, was Tarantino. No one confirmed or denied it. I always thought that strange.

"In the long run, volunteers are the most expensive workers you'll ever have." -Red Green

Well, to be truly accurate and faithful to the analogy, he was an enthusiastic early member of a promising community which scored some early successes, he stood by his disgraceful behaviour as many of his peers condemned it as unnecessary and even amoral, he stuck to his guns as the entity entered a death spiral of reducing membership and thus lower quality and influence of the product, and once there was nobody left to object or even really give a crap, he brave!y answered the call to greatness, and became part of their inner circle, to march forward with a new grand plan for success, that nobody else with an interest in the product really understands, let alone had a say in drafting, being seen as outsiders or suppressive persons.

He never was nice, and he would only interest some very weird people, who perhaps want to borrow his binoculars or sniffing equipment. He does however, now have direct power over other people's ability to speak about the quality of the product, where he previously did not.